Halachos of Sukkah Maamid

Topics

• The Sugya of Meimid
• The Mishnah and the Rabbanan
• The Gemara’s Reasoning
• Rashi on an Unstable Sukkah
• The Sugya of Maamid
• The Case of Karei Amir
• The Shitah of the Rishonim
• The Machlokes Remains Unresolved
• The Bach and the Ramban
• The Bach: Ma’amid Pasul Min HaTorah
• Pesul Tza'ach and Gazel
• The Issue of Maimed and Gazel
• Canvas Sukkahs and Davar Mekabel Tumah
• The Ran and the Scope of the Pesul
• What It Means in Practice
• Source in the Be’er HaLachah
• Reish Lamed in the Be’er Halacha and the DeGrah
• Small Pieces of Wood and the Aruch HaShulchan
• Gezeirah, Minag, and Pesul Mayim
• Halachah Lemaaseh
• Practical Distinction
• Mishnah Berurah and the Practical Halachah
• What the Mishnah Berurah Brings Down
• Halacha L’Maaseh in the Sugya
• The Mechaber on Keva
• The Sukkah with a Ladder
• Ma’amid, Davar Mekabel Tumah, and the Sukkah Structure
• The Magen Avraham and Acharon Shulchan
• The Problem of Ma’amed in a Sukkah
• The Be’er Yaakov and the Question of Another Sukkah
• The Acharonim on the Be’er Yaakov
• Chiddushei Shani on Ma’amid de-Ma’amid
• A Practical Case
• Maimit and the Question of Mataneder
• Keeping the Wood Down
• The Beginning of the Sugya
• L’shem Tzel
• Fiberglass Sockets and Ra’ui L’schach
• The House and Tzel D’fanos
• Maimed From the Top
• Kavanah and what counts as maimon
• Reb Yosef and the next kashya
• The Kuntzayis in What Is Holding It Up
• Quick Chazarah
• The Question of What Counts as Ma’amin
• Lema’aseh According to the Poskim
• An Alternative Eitzah
• Maimid and Tosefes Chizuk
• Gluing the Schach
• Mats, Bamboo, and Wooden Sticks
• Two Different Suggestions
• The Problem of Kvius
• The Sugya of Ma’amid
• Tying It to Something Outside the Sukkah
• What Is the Problem With Tying It Down?
• Maimed to Maimed
• Another Problem
• Chazon Ish and the Reading of the Source
• The Common Mistake in Mamed to Mamed
• What the Chazon Ish Himself Held

Transcript

# The Sugya of Meimid

Okay, the sugya of meimid. What is the sugya of meimid? Any good yeshiva bachur knows: when you hear the word meimid, you get nervous. And then they know the Chazal say, “what is meimid?” So let us discuss what meimid is. Does it really exist? Then we will see what meimid really is, and what the Chazal actually hold about it.

## The Mishnah and the Rabbanan

The discussion begins with a Mishnah. If one makes a sukkah with a support that is mekabel tumah, it is kosher; the Rabbanan say it is kosher. It is Pesach, it cannot stand by itself, so it is pasul. According to the Rabbanan, in any case it is kosher. There is no need to ask why the Rabbanan hold that way, because there is no issue. The Rabbanan say it is a regular sukkah; it is fine, there is nothing wrong with it, and it is kosher.

## The Gemara’s Reasoning

The Gemara asks for the reason of the Rabbanan. One answer is that it is because it has no keva. If it cannot stand by itself, then it has no keva, so it is not a sukkah. What is it then? Another answer is that it is because it is supported by something that is mekabel tumah. This is where the idea of meimid by something that is mekabel tumah comes from.

So you might say: the Gemara is explicit, the Mishnah is explicit, and that is that. But the truth is that it is not so simple. First, perhaps we pasken like the Rabbanan. Who says we בכלל pasken like this concern of meimid? According to Rabbi Yehuda, this may be a problem of meimid. But according to the Rabbanan, you see there is no meimid, because it is kosher. So perhaps we pasken like the Rabbanan.

And even if we pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, perhaps we pasken like the first answer in the Gemara: ein lo keva. The issue is that it has no keva.

# Rashi on an Unstable Sukkah

Rashi: “shimital telus alidei mitah” — it is moving; it is not stable. It is such an unstable sukkah. Rebbe Yehudah holds, “domeh sukkah dira keva binan” — a sukkah must be built like a permanent dwelling. We generally pasken that a sukkah is “dira arai”; it is a temporary structure. So, in peshat, we pasken like keva? Then there should really be no sukkah at all according to Rebbe Yehudah, unless you have the second sukkah: “shemamidah,” even though it is invalid for schach.

# The Sugya of Maamid

I ask on Rashi, and this is a very important Rashi in the sugya of maamid. It is only a psul in the sukkah. “V’hoyol v’ikaro ha’schach eilu ha’mamidin, hava k’ilu sikhech.” Since the maamid is what holds up the sukkah, without it the sukkah would not exist. It is part of the sukkah. So just as there is a psul of davar ha’mekabel tumah in the sukkah, there is a psul of davar ha’mekabel tumah in the maamid.

But who says we pasken like this, according to Rebbe Yehudah? And who says we pasken like this, in peshat, according to Rebbe Yehudah? This is a very big machlokes Rishonim, and afterward a machlokes Acharonim. The Rosh paskens like the Rabbanan. The Rosh says we pasken like the Rabbanan.

# The Case of Karei Amir

So we come to the Mishnah Berurah — take out your Mishnah Berurah. The Rosh says we pasken like the Rabbanan, so there is no sugya at all of psul davar ha'mekabel tumah. So what is the case? “Asa’im u’sukkasi b’karei amir” — karei are the poles of the bed. If it can stand on its own, then it can remain. Without the bed, it is very weak. What are you talking about, karei amir? You are talking about nothing. You are talking about a sukkah that has basically nothing to it.

So if it can stand, then it is keva. If not, it is not keva. But the davar ha'mekabel tumah — why is that? Because the bed is a kli, and a kli is mekabel tumah. So it is a maamid for the davar ha'mekabel tumah, for the sukkah. So you are being maamid with a davar ha'mekabel tumah. So again...

# The Shitah of the Rishonim

Maybe we pasken like the Rabbanan. And even if we pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, that it is not kosher, maybe the reason is because it is not like Heva, the first pshat. So the Rosh says that we pasken like the Rabbanan.

The Trumas HaDeshen says that we pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, but according to the first reason of Rabbi Yehuda. He says there is no problem of life; it does not exist, as it says in Trumas HaDeshen and Siman Tzadik-Daled. So where does the problem come from? The Rabbanan and the Rebbe pasken like Rabbi Yehuda, the second pshat in the Gemara. Rabbi Yehuda, the second pshat in the Gemara. Then we have a problem of ma'amid, which means it is held up by a davar ha-mekabel tumah.

# The Machlokes Remains Unresolved

So just because there is a machlokes rishonim, we still do not have a hachlatah how to pasken. In the Rif, I do not want to be marech now, but there is a Rif that the Ran learns one pshat in the Rif, that he paskens like Rabbi Yehuda, the second pshat. Some rishonim in the Rif and others learn in the Rif that it is not that way. It is a shaylah how to learn the Rif, and it is not for now, because I am just trying to bring out that it is a mevucheh.

# The Bach and the Ramban

Avi chol, how do we pasken? So who is going to be machria? The first person to be machria is the Bach. So you should know that the Bach is the author of ma'amid, and I was soon going to learn that maybe the Mechaber also paskens. It is not so poshut; there is a sefer in Avraham that says that there is no such Mechaber. But the Bach is clear.

So if you want to know ma'amid, ma'amid and Bach should be associated in your mind. But the one who paskens the ma'amid is the Bach. The Bach says we pasken like the Ramban. He likes the Ramban. The Ramban is the machria among the rishonim, he says. The Ramban is the machria, and the ma'amar becomes poshut.

# The Bach: Ma’amid Pasul Min HaTorah

Passul? You hear? Passul. Passul? Passul. *V’lo rak middas chassidus*, says the Bach. It is not a chumra; it is a psul. So according to the Bach, one has to be concerned with the union of the ma’amid and the rosh of the Rabbanan. When the Bach pasuls with the sheetah of the Ramban, is this ma’amid a psul of the reisha, or is this ma’amid a psul of the Rabbanan? What is the nafka minah? Extremely, extremely relevant, as we are soon going to learn.

The Bach comes along and says that the ma’amid is pasul min haTorah. Why? He relies on that Rashi I spoke to you about. Rashi comes along and says that there is a psul in the kabbaltum and the schach. And since we learned that the thing that holds up the schach is like the schach, he learns in that Rashi that Rashi means that even the ma’amid is pasul. Just like when I tell you there is a psul, the kabbaltum, on the schach, so too that Rashi is mechadish that the ma’amid is also like the schach. And the Bach brings down the schach; he brings this. That is his nekudah, that Rashi. That is a big thing by the Bach, this Rashi.

The Ran learns this Rashi differently. The Ran learns in this Rashi that it is not davka; all he meant is that it is a din derabbanan. There is a din derabbanan that since there is a psul of reisha on the schach, the Rabbanan made the ma’amid like the schach. The Bach does not want to learn like this. The Bach says: I stick with my shittah, that it is de’oraisa, with the Rashi, and it is a psul. So it is mamash pasul min haTorah. If you make a ma’amid and a davar...

# Pesul Tza'ach and Gazel

Mekabel tumah. We are soon going to learn that davar mekabel tumah is only one instance of pesul tza‘ach. There are many other cases of pesul tza‘ach as well. For example, something may be invalid not only because it is pasul because of ma’aseh, but because there is a pesul tza‘ach.

So could the ma’aseh be ta‘aseh l’man ha’aseh? There is a pesul gazel on the tza‘ach. Rav Moshe speaks about this in the teshuvos, a beautiful teshuvah from Rav Moshe, that the ma’aseh has to be careful to be free of the pesul of gazel. Because if it is, then just as the tza‘ach is pasul if it is gazel, the ma’aseh would also be pasul because of gazel.

The sukkah in the exilus is kosher, because that was before shalach; we learned this in the Gemara, right? The sukkah, the karka in the exilus, so there is no pesul. But the woods—there is a special halachah of kinyan meshichah, right? In the third perek of Devarim, you just have to pay back the money; the sukkah is kosher. But if it is gazel, the tza‘ach is pasul, and the ma’aseh would have that problem as well.

Therefore, I want to be careful about this, because I want you to know that sometimes you find wood. For example, here in Westgate they are doing a lot of construction, and there are many pieces of wood, and children take those woods—my children included. My children came home with beams and wanted to use them, and they said those beams were thrown out because they had nails in them, and there is a junk pile and a good pile. I said, listen, do me a favor: the whole ma’aseh, are you listening? The whole ma’aseh might not be a chir problem. Which means you might be able to be ma’aseh on a davar mekabel tumah, but if you do it on a gazel, it is a kabaltum—not on the tza‘ach.

But this is not ma’aseh. The ma’aseh is not the walls; the ma’aseh is the tza‘ach. The problem is on the tza‘ach. Two suggestions: one is the walls.

# The Issue of Maimed and Gazel

Because it is binyan. Then the schach is a different problem, and if he says your mamash is not the yetzer, I do not remember offhand exactly where the teshuvah is. I thought the maimed was when the schach is resting on the mutammik. Right, but the maimed itself becomes part of the schach. So if the maimed is a gazel, says her maiseh, you would not be yotzei. So it is like uvi. You see, you have to make the cheshbon.

The whole maimed might be mutar, because we pasken like the Bach, which I will soon show you. Many Rishonim, including the Mechaber and the Magen Avraham, hold that there is no real din maimed anyway. It is mutar laleches to have a maimed; there is no problem. So you would have more of an issue with a gazel if you took a maimed. Let us say you took a piece of wood to put on top of your sukkah to make the maimed, for example in canvas sukkahs. People put a piece of wood there. If it is gazel, you run into more problems than just putting the schach straight on top of a davar mekabel tumah.

## Canvas Sukkahs and Davar Mekabel Tumah

אגב, if you want to know, maybe another day in another shiur I will explain to you that the canvas sukkahs, those poles are probably not mekabel tumah anyway. I spoke to you about it, and I am certain about it, because they are made for the sukkah. Those poles were made l’sheim vesichuch; they are made to be kosher for schach and sukkah, to hold up the sukkah. So they are not a davar mekabel tumah. Something that is made for a sukkah is not made l’binyan; it is made l’sheim schach. It is a sukkah by itself.

I know you cannot write because you do not know the whole background behind it. Just trust me on it, that the canvas sukkahs—everybody is going to tell you that you have to put a piece of wood across, because otherwise you are being on top of a davar mekabel tumah. It is not so poshut. It is not for tonight. Trust me. It is a long sugya, and then we are not going to get to the sugya of maimed. That is the gela maiseh.

All I am trying to bring out is that the sugya of maimed is a machlokes, whether it is de’oraisa or derabanan, according to the...

# The Ran and the Scope of the Pesul

According to the Ran, it is only rabbinic. The Bach is medayek from Rashi, but the Ran himself in Rashi does not read it that way. The point is that it is not only doverim and kabbal tumah that are a problem for the ma’amim. All pesulei schach are a problem if the ma’amim would have those pesulim as well. Whatever is not kosher for schach, the ma’amim is also not allowed to be. We will discuss later in this year certain dinim that schach has and the ma’amim does not have. Whatever the pesul is in the ma’amim, that is the issue. Whatever is a pesul for schach cannot be in the ma’amim. And the question is whether this is de’oraisa or rabbanan.

# What It Means in Practice

What does that mean in practice? I will tell you. What happens if the entire pesul in the ma’amim is only a rabbinic pesul? For example, if you take a board that is more than four tefachim wide, that board is pasul only mid’rabbanan because of gezeiras tikra. Here the ma’amim is only pasul mid’rabbanan. The whole din of ma’amim might only be rabbinic to begin with; maybe it is only a double rabbinic concern.

If you learn that it is de’oraisa, then the whole sugya of ma’amim is de’oraisa, so we can apply it even to something that is a pesul schach mid’rabbanan. But if you learn that it is only rabbinic, maybe you could say that by two rabbinic concerns we do not say it.

# Source in the Be’er HaLachah

Where did I get this from? The Be’er HaLachah discusses this at the beginning of the perek.

# Reish Lamed in the Be’er Halacha and the DeGrah

Reish Lamed, in the name of the DeGrah, brings that only on a sukkah pesulah de’oraisa is there a problem of mind. Something that is only a sukkah pesulah de’rabbanan has no such problem. See the Be’er Halacha at the beginning of Siman Reish Lamed, in the name of the DeGrah. The nafka minah I just mentioned is these large boards.

Less than four tefachim, we do not use. I do not know whether people of agav or chatz can tell you this, but we do not use even less for s’chach. This is only al tzamimnik. The Mishnah Berurah brings down that the current practice is not to use even three or two.

# Small Pieces of Wood and the Aruch HaShulchan

The question becomes: what about the small pieces of wood? That is a very big topic among the Acharonim. In Yerushalayim they used it. Or Shternbuch brings down from the daily Yerushalayim that they all used it. Ma’aseh Yisrael, the Aruch HaShulchan—I showed it to our blazers at Krasna this morning—says clearly, I think it is in Siman Lamed-Kimel. I do not have the Aruch HaShulchan here. He says that even the k’tani k’tanim, the minhag is not to use. That means even little pieces, less than a tefach, slats—they do not use them.

I do not mind, from time to time, to teach you, but I am trying to give the kids just a little bit. There is an Aruch HaShulchan, a peldige Aruch HaShulchan, because he says k’tani k’tanim. Unless he means k’tani k’tanim more than a tefach, I do not know. It is hard to know what he means. He says you do not do it because there is tikra.

The thing is, I was medayek. Why am I medayek? Because today those little things are not used for tikra. Nobody uses them. The reason the Aruch HaShulchan brings tikra is that people use it for a tikra, for a roof. No roofer is going to use a piece that is less than a tefach. That is not how roofs are made today. In those times they did; I think they did. That is how the Aruch HaShulchan is.

What is the gezeirah? The gezeirah is tikra, since people use it. Is the gezeirah a rabbinic one? Yes, it is a gezeirah de’rabbanan, but it is nichlal on the ground.

# Gezeirah, Minag, and Pesul Mayim

Gezeirah that were machmir. He says, *v’lo matzinu*. The loshon of the Arach HaShulchan is, *v’lo matzinu mish yisach b’eitz*. They בכלל don’t use tree. It’s not within the gezeirah, saying there’s less than that. It’s not nikar on the gezeirah.

That’s the shaylah: the gezeirah was on four. The minag is, the way the poskim bring it down, mitzad ha-minag, they aser less than four. So, lechora, there wouldn’t be a pesul mayim on less than four, right? Because it’s only a minag. The shaylah is four, which is only derabbanan.

So the Gra, which the Beis HaLevi brings down, since it’s only derabbanan, you can’t come and say that there’s a problem of davar mayim, because the whole thing is only a pesul derabbanan. So the mayim is only a pesul s’chach mid’rabbanan, so there’s no problem of mayim.

# Halachah Lemaaseh

What is the halachah lemaaseh? The Pri Megadim, in Eishel Avraham, Taf-Reish Chof-Tes, se’if katan yud-aleph, says a yarei Shamayim should not use even a pesul derabbanan for a mayim. He says that even though, be’etzem, there is a makom to be meikil, which is this Gra, a yarei Shamayim does not do it.

If you look at the Bikkurei Yaakov in se’if katan yud-aleph, he says he can be meikil, which is this goyim.

Lemaaseh, I don’t have time to go through it with you in detail; the olam doesn’t want to hear. But there is a stirah in the Mishnah Berurah, enough of a stirah. If you look at the Bi’ur Halachah that I told you, pesul derabbanan from the goyim, he just said there is no mayim. If you look at the Mishnah Berurah in Taf-Reish Chof-Tes, se’if katan yud-aleph, he says clearly that all mayim which are pesulim mid’rabbanan are a problem. There is a stirah in the Mishnah Berurah; I have a yishuv, but that’s a pilpul she’eino tzorech.

# Practical Distinction

You’re saying you can’t be maschich totally with these things, but you can have beams in your... Exactly. What I’m saying is like this: you can’t use one tefach, a tefach and more, and according to the Chashukim maybe even less than a tefach, for a s’chach. But you definitely could put the s’chach on it, because since it’s only a minag, there shouldn’t be a problem. For which is derabbanan, that’s a machlokes.

# Mishnah Berurah and the Practical Halachah

And there are two Mishnah Berurah on it. Oh, I’m so sorry. I’m very sorry. It’s a common occurrence that people who sit next to me get wet. It’s very normal.

So, isn’t there a difference between Sulaym-e Rabbana and a minhalik? My talmidim know. I always tell them: if you don’t have life insurance and health insurance, you shouldn’t sit next to me during a shiur. I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I have to use water. I’m thirsty.

Listen, for a moment, you shouldn’t use more than four tefachim either. For a moment, four tefachim and more you shouldn’t use, as the prime minister. I believe that because it was Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, now it’s the afterlife and the sustenance. Remember that was the line I said, right? Four tefachim is huge. I haven’t been this wide. That’s right. So that’s not four tefachim. So that’s fine? That’s fine. For a moment, it’s fine. You can sit directly under them. It’s fine. Fine.

Is there a difference between Sulaym-e Rabbana and Sulaym-e Rabbana? That’s what I’m saying. So, in the stereo, you said there’s a step. Mishnah Berurah is matched by any Rabbana. One Rabbana, in one place he says Rabbana and Maimon is kosher. That’s the Bi’ur Halachah and Tafresh Lamed. And it’s in Tafresh Hafei. Tafresh Hafei says that even the Rabbana you shouldn’t have is a Maimon. But nothing about Menach. Menach is kosher. I don’t see a makom. Again, maybe a hrem. Listen, I don’t know all the hrem. I just know how I look at it. That would relate to that stereotype. You learn Mishnah Berurah, it’s not there. There’s no shting on the minute.

## What the Mishnah Berurah Brings Down

Okay. This is all beautiful. What’s l’maiseh? Halacha, halacha, halacha, l’maiseh. Shailah: what’s the sheetah of the Mishnah Berurah? So everybody take out your Mishnah Berurah. The Mishnah Berurah in se’if-sin, in Tafresh Lamed. Let’s see how he brings down the halacha of mita. Does he bring it down nusach of the Rabbanan? Or does he bring it down...

I can’t tell you, l’maiseh, how if you learn this thing, it’s how beautiful pshat is, and how beautiful the poskim can be. Every word, the poskim from the bag. Every single word.

# Halacha L’Maaseh in the Sugya

And everything is l’maaseh, mamash halacha l’maaseh. Every word in the sugya is halacha l’maaseh. When we learn kachim, we should have learned it that way as well, but we do not have the Beis HaMikdash. In the times of the Beis HaMikdash, they would learn kachim the way we learn ma’aser.

# The Mechaber on Keva

Let us see the Mechaber. What does the Mechaber bring down? If it has gav, knu, yud, it is kasher. Why? Because it is keva. He brings the lashon of keva, in Taf-Reish Lamed, the end of Taf-Reish Lamed, by mitah. Knu—what is the sugya? Read it, knu. Since it has yud tefachim, what is the ma’aleh of yud tefachim? Because it is keva. You see clearly that he brings the sugya of keva.

You see that the shittah of the Mechaber is klal. Because if it is a davar hamekabel tumah, it has nothing to do with how high it is. You are being meyasem on a davar hamekabel tumah.

# The Sukkah with a Ladder

The Mechaber, in Taf-Reish Kuf Tes, se’if zayin, has a whole safek whether you are allowed to put the schach on top of a sukkah that has in it a sulam, a ladder. What is the shaylah? The Taz says: the sulam is a kli. A kli is a davar hamekabel tumah. The sulam is a ma’akev to a davar she’eino mekabel tumah; maybe it is a mechitzah.

You see clearly that the Mechaber had a safek about a davar hamekabel tumah. On one hand, here in the sugya of mitah, he learns that the whole problem is aimed at keva. And in the sugya of the sulam, everybody has Taf-Reish Kuf Tes, se’if zayin. I do not mind waiting a moment to make sure that you internalize it.

# Ma’amid, Davar Mekabel Tumah, and the Sukkah Structure

On one hand, the Mechaber says that as long as it goes all the way up to the s’chach, it is not a problem. Why not? Because it is kavua. Obviously, it goes up because it is al tzamid. There is no difference; it should be possible either way. You see that he understood the sugya as having to do with ein lekeva.

By the sugya of tzolim, by contrast, you see clearly that he has a safek. The Taz says: what is the safek? It is a ma’amid, a davar me’kabel tumah. A tzolim is a davar me’kabel tumah.

## The Magen Avraham and Acharon Shulchan

Truthfully, there are many possibilities. There is a Magen Avraham that wants to be mechaleik, and there is an Acharon Shulchan that wants to be mechaleik. I do not mind doing a few one day. It is not noge’a l’halachah lema’aseh, okay?

The only thing is that the Acharon Shulchan has an interesting chiddush: that the case of kari amit is on the outside of the sukkah, and the tzolim is in the middle. In the tzolim, in the middle, we have a problem of masach me’kabel tumah, of ma’amid davar me’kabel tumah. On the outside, nisht. Very interesting cheshbon.

How do you know what the kari amit is? Kari amit is on the outside, meaning he has four poles. Ah, okay—the queen’s beds. In those days it was called the queen’s... And that was outside the sukkah? That was four on the four nakalit amit. There are four poles on the outside. So the s’chach in the middle is fine, but on the outskirts it is being nimad on a davar me’kabel tumah.

The Acharon Shulchan says, in siman yud ches, that it is not a problem when it is on the outside. When it is inside the sukkah, then it becomes a problem. So it is a very big chiddush. He wants to be mechadesh that according to the Mechaber there is a problem of ma’amid when it is on the inside.

Lema’aseh, the Acharon Shulchan, either way, we hold that there is a problem of ma’amid, and the Mishnah Berurah in siman katan chaf-gimmel says clearly the same halachah, that we are choshesh for ma’amid on a davar me’kabel tumah, and it is asur. That is the shittah of the Chofetz Chaim. Okay, so we have it clearly from the Acharon Shulchan.

# The Problem of Ma’amed in a Sukkah

There are other Acharonim as well. Mishnah Berurah and others all say the same thing: l’halachah l’maaseh, there is a problem of ma’amed. So what is my she’eilah? Am I going to come out and say that it is assur? I cannot say that it is assur, because then the question becomes whether this is l’chatchilah or b’dieved. That is the question. The Shulchan and the Mishnah Berurah both say that there is a problem of ma’amed. I agree with you, but is it l’chatchilah or b’dieved?

# The Be’er Yaakov and the Question of Another Sukkah

There is a Be’er Yaakov, in Taf-Reish-Chaf-Tes, siman katan nun-gimmel, that if the sukkah is a ma’amed and he does not have another sukkah, it is kosher and he may make a berachah on it, because the entire sukkah of a ma’amed stands on a heron. It is not such a simple sukkah, and we do not know whether it exists, and even if it does exist, perhaps it is only a sha’as ha’dchak on a heron. On such a sukkah, one may make a berachah.

I was never sure how to read this Be’er Yaakov. I had to look it up, because perhaps he meant only that if you do not have another sukkah, then you cannot go to your friend. If you can go to your friend, maybe you should not sit in such a sukkah. That does not mean that if a person has a sukkah like that, he should go sit in it. Perhaps what he meant was that the next sukkah is a block away, and he has to go to the Taf-Reish-Chaf-Tes, down, down, who knows where, to get another sukkah. That is too difficult. But if you can go to your next-door neighbor, maybe you should go to your next-door neighbor’s sukkah and not sit in a sukkah that has a ma’amed.

# The Acharonim on the Be’er Yaakov

I want to tell you that all the Acharonim on this Be’er Yaakov, and Emes LeYaakov writes clearly, hold that it is l’chatchilah: it is just a sukkah, and you may make a berachah; there is no problem of ma’amed. ממש, it should be good. Be’er Yaakov and Emes LeYaakov.

And I also brought, because I know the olam is going to say, I brought this in Karel, a sefer, and he quotes this b’shem the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish told him to make a sukkah with a ma’amed, with a ma’amed adamik ableton. He says it clearly.

# Chiddushei Shani on Ma’amid de-Ma’amid

Okay, let me read it for you. It is in Chiddushei Shani, in Hilchos Shabbos. In the back of Hilchos Shabbos, the last volume, he has a section on Sukkah. We are going to read it inside, and then he will say, I did not make it up; it should be בדווקא. It is a mistake. Okay, בדבר רמז חוטים. בניר פשוט.

See, he says—meaning, we are soon going to learn this—that even the Chazon Ish, who said מַעֲמִיד דְּמַעֲמִיד, that the thing holding up the thing that is holding up is a problem, did not mean that this is halachah. It is only for the מדקדקים. I remember that he says clearly that he told me to make a sukkah on top of metal poles of כביסה. They used to have strings to hang the clothing when it was dry. It was like metal tubes, you hear?

## A Practical Case

All right. He says, what is the case? Sometimes you go to yeshiva, and the yeshiva is not full of the biggest talmidei chachamim in the world. So you put up a sukkah with a ma’amid. You are stamping out, you are running out. רמז חוטים, you are going to go eat next door, and you are going to be able to turn up the whole thing. He brings this case.

Do you want to read it? You can take it, and I enjoy it. I want you to enjoy it also. Come on, lay it down. Okay, guys?

# Maimit and the Question of Mataneder

And then he says: if you want to do it, you do not have to be mataneder, because there is no shalach av davar mekabel tumah. It does not really exist. Chazay nish — it is good enough for you? Chabosah, I beg you, I beg you: do not listen to what people say in the street. People walk around saying things b’shem gedolim; they do not know. Gedolim understood halachah. They understood. You have to read it again.

Sigo, go ahead. Lenas, Lenas, show your father; it is right there. From here, this piece, go ahead. Go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. You know, if it is hard and he is not a mataneder on maimit, leave it alone. As I told you, the gazel might be more of a problem for your maimit than the whole maimit.

Go ahead, I do not care what you do. Maimit is a very weak thing. You make it out of who knows what. The frightening halachah, maimit, maimit, maimit — the whole maimit is a weak halachah. Is there a problem with machub and mataneder? Are we going to talk about that? It is going to start, right? Let me tell you: there is no shaylah. Of course, let us start if you can, but if you cannot.

I will tell you why I am thinking this year. I was going to put up the wood. The wind is so strong. I am terrified to put up the wood.

# Keeping the Wood Down

And how am I going to keep that wood down? You’re not gaining anything. If you knew Hilchos, you’d understand that you’re not gaining anything. To tie down the mind... We’re going to get to it, we’re going to get to it. Ziplocs? Zip ties? Or are you talking about bamboo strings? Special things are not in the Kabbalas Tumah. The twine.

# The Beginning of the Sugya

Let me discuss everything with you. This is just the beginning of the shiur. We’re going to go through everything, and then you’ll see how, once you know it, it looks like a completely different sugya. You’ll see it from a different angle.

So far, as they state, like I said to you, we only know this by dovarim and Kabbalas Tumah. We still do not yet know it by the other pesul. For example, when it is still attached. A lot of times people want to put the maimed on the houses.

So I want you to know, there is a little in Hilchos. You know who Hilchos is? He is the gadol of the generation today. His name is Rav Chaim Kanievsky, and he brings this halachah. It is not only by dovarim and Kabbalas Tumah, but by all pesulei Yisrael.

And that is how I begin to share with you: all pesulei Yisrael have a prominent maimed. So technically, you have a problem. It is not meant only for dovarim and Kabbalas Tumah; the way the Gemara brings it is by dovarim and Kabbalas Tumah, and that is where maimed is rooted. But the emes is that the poskim, and you see that Rav Chaim Kanievsky learned that way, if you look in Hilchos, it is all pesulim. Look how Rav Chaim brings it: all pesulim of Yisrael have a prominent maimed.

And that is why I ask you to have some lomdus. But I will tell you, I have a very big kasha. You know what my kasha is? All my years I have this kasha: the maimed is not there.

# L’shem Tzel

L’shem Tzel, the mind is there to keep up the L’shem Tzel. L’shem Tzel, the mind is there to keep up the L’shem Tzel. L’shem Tzel, the mind is there to keep up the L’shem Tzel. L’shem Tzel, the mind is there to keep up the L’shem Tzel. L’shem Tzel, the mind is there to keep up the L’shem Tzel.

# Fiberglass Sockets and Ra’ui L’schach

You can’t use these fiberglass sockets. You can’t use—what’s it called? Yes, that’s exactly what I just told you. The bias, that’s exactly what I just told you. That’s the chivish. The chivish is that maybe the pshat is only dover mekabel tumah. Well, the pshat is that anything that has to be maimed has to be ra’ui l’schach. That’s what I was telling you.

Reb Chaim is learning that since the house is not ra’ui l’schach, you are saying two nekudos: one, that it is pasul l’schach and not ra’ui for schach. Okay, let’s continue, but you hear my shaylah.

# The House and Tzel D’fanos

Now let’s discuss: why is the house a ra’ui l’schach? I mean, there is a maimed in front of the house. What kind of tzel is it giving you? You have a nest of arba. You have a nest of arba. It’s giving you tzel. What kind of tzel is it giving you? It’s a ra’ui l’schach.

Huh? The house? The wall of the house? It’s not tzel l’schach. I mean, it can’t be tzel from the side. Tzel d’fanos. Tzel d’fanos is not called tzel. It’s not called tzel. Adam yoshev b’tzel d’fanos. That’s the psul. Ashtorei’s Karnaya, when a person was hired in the 20s. Adam yoshev b’tzel d’fanos. Adam yoshev b’tzel d’fanos is not ra’ui l’schach.

What’s the psul attaching it to the wall? What’s the psul attaching it to the wall of the house? The house is not ra’ui l’schach. So if it’s not ra’ui l’schach, it’s not ra’ui l’schach. Okay, let’s continue. If it’s a problem—l’cha’orah, Koy k’yip Chaim Kanievsky—it should be a problem. You take a look at the...

# Maimed From the Top

Okay, another nekudah is maimed from the top. What happens if I put the schach on top, instead of putting the maimed on the bottom, and I put the schach on top? What happens if it’s maimed from the top? So the wind should blow it off. The wind should blow it off. It’s amazing. The Mareil speaks of that. There’s a very famous Mareil. The Mareil says that’s still called maimed. It’s awesome. It’s not supporting it. It’s totally...

# Kavanah and what counts as maimon

What is your kavanah? We call it mitzis. Is the maimon underneath, or is the maimon holding? If I am putting it there... Gosh, you have learned the whole sugya. That the maimon is holding.

If I am putting it there not for sale, even though it is fit for sale, I am putting it there as a weight. But it is fit for sale, so then what? If it is fit for sale, it is called a kach. I am talking about an apostle thing. If I took something, a rock, and put rocks on top, so your maimon... And you are talking about from before and onward? I am talking about from before now.

Anything which is apostle or shach, I put it on top. It is a maimon and an apostle. It is maimon and an apostle. Everybody understands maimon from underneath. The truth is that maimon, according to my re’iyah and according to many poskim, can be from the top also. But it has to be that it is there to do something with the shach, anything that holds down the shach. Everything?

# Reb Yosef and the next kashya

You know, over the years I understood Reb Yosef. Reb Yosef is very interesting in talking about these things. We are still going to get to it in a minute. The next part of the shiur you must know: a gevaldige kashya for Tzvi Pesach Frank.

Tzvi Pesach Frank, in the Keresh Chayil of Simcha Fal, has a maimon kashya. Let us say you take a piece of wood and put it on top of the canvas sukkah because you want maimon on a davar which is kosher. So you put a small piece of wood. So what is really holding up the sukkah? That piece of wood is holding it. If you took away that wood, the whole thing is going to stand on the... So it is really standing on the... So the metal is not a maimon. The metal is the maimon. What does it help you? Tzvi Pesach Frank? It does not understand the whole sukkah.

Let us say you put something on top of it. You put a piece of wood to make sure that it is not a maimon or a davar. It does not help you anything, because at the end of the day the real...

# The Kuntzayis in What Is Holding It Up

The thing that is holding it up—that is what I am trying to explain to you—is not a din in what Rabbi said. It is not what is underneath; it is what is holding it. That is the kuntzayis.

Rabbi Frank says, and this is a great yesod in Maimonides, that Maimonides only said it when there is no kepeh, only where something is actually holding it up and nothing more, because it looks like part of the schach. The thing that is holding it up is not a din in what Rabbi said. See how the kuntzayis can argue in the yesod of Maimonides? Is Maimonides anything that holds it up? Maimonides is the pshat that something underneath it, which looks like part of the schach, is a problem.

Am I saying it too fast? Am I going a little too quickly? What would be something that is part of it? Can I glue it down? Then it would be perfect. If you hide it—that means if he hides it, you can’t see it? You can’t see it. If it is a hekeit kehaloches, then maybe it is a problem. There is a very famous teshuvah from Rav Vozner about gluing, and I am going to talk to you about gluing with the Chazon Ish, Maimonides, and Maimonides.

# Quick Chazarah

So let us make a quick chazarah, because I do not know whether I am going to spill too much information too quickly. Again: Maimonides. It is holding it up; it depends on what they are getting. What? Glue? It cannot be mesachim glue. It cannot be mesachim glue—what are you talking about?

So let us make a quick chazarah. The first shaylah becomes Maimonides: does it or does it not exist? In the Chazon Ish you see clearly that it might not necessarily exist. Even if it exists, it is important to know what it is. Is Maimonides that it is holding it up, or Maimonides that it is holding it?

# The Question of What Counts as Ma’amin

Is it underneath, or is it the fact that it holds it? The nafka mina would be if it is on top. The Mareel says that even if it is on top, it is still called a ma’amin.

Another nafka mina is if there is a piece of wood on top of the metal, as in a metal sukkah. What is holding up the schach? The metal. You are not going to say that the wood is holding it up. Since what is under the sukkah is the wood, that is already called ma’amin. And, as I said, the nafka mina would be in things that are not necessarily obvious. He says it is a heker, the holding of ma’amin. It looks like it is part of the sukkah, and someone may use a pasul sukkah because of it. So it is something that you cannot tell.

Rav Azna says there should not be a nafka mina.

# Lema’aseh According to the Poskim

Lema’aseh, Reb Eliyashiv, Reb Shlomo Zalman, and Reb Nissen Karel pasken that even if you have wood on top of a metal sukkah, it is not going to help, because the real ma’amin is the poles underneath. It is not true that the wood on top changes that. Tzifa Esra wants to be mechadesh that the wood on top will help. But if you hold that it is a problem of ma’amin, then, says Reb Eliyashiv, Reb Shlomo Zalman, and Reb Nissen Karel, it does not help, because the real thing holding up the sukkah is actually the metal poles. It is holding up the metal poles, so it does not even help.

It is interesting; a lot of people do it, so it is not so pashut according to the poskim that it works.

# An Alternative Eitzah

Now let me tell you over... What is their eitzah? I do not know. The eitzah is that you will have to listen to me and Reb David Feinstein, that the whole metal pole is in the mechadish, because it is made for the sukkah. Okay.

# Maimid and Tosefes Chizuk

Chazanish is a Meidic Yiddish. Chazanish wants to say that if the schach could stand by itself, and one added a maimid to be mechazek the schach, that is not called a maimid. Kuf mem gimmel, oiz beis. A maimid has to be something that is holding it up, so that without it, it would fall. But if the pshat is that without it, it would not fall anyway, then technically, if I put in nails just to be mechazek, this is not a real sugya of maimid.

So the schach does not roll off. Meaning, it is going to stay in place; it is not going to roll off with the wind. That is not a problem. I do not know if that is what he means, but tosefes is chizuk. I do not know how to direct tosefes is chizuk. I guess maybe just to make it guaranteed that it is not going to roll off, even on the bottom. Is that what you are sitting under, or is that even on the side? It has nothing to do with that. The yesod of maimid means that it is actually holding it up, not that it is enforcing it down. Like those nails—are they maimid or not? Which nails are you talking about? To hold, to hold, to prevent the...

That is what I am saying. L’chaiv, tosefes is chizuk is anyway not a problem. That is what I am trying to tell you. Chazanish is clear: that maimid is only when it holds it up. If it would stay up anyway and the nails are just there to be maizik, there is no such thing. I guess you do a ruach metzuyah, and a ruach metzuyah, obviously.

## Gluing the Schach

Now, what about, like I said, gluing it? I said Rav Azzah says you are allowed to glue it. Chayim tayin is yin’al glu. We spoke about this. There is a whole shaylah if it is a lot of b’kavua. For example, let us say you have...

# Mats, Bamboo, and Wooden Sticks

These mats—what do you call them? Right, there are two kinds: they make mats from bamboo, and they also make them from little wooden sticks. There are those with little wooden sticks.

Rabbi Yosef says that those wooden sticks, if you tie them down, that is called kabur, and schach cannot be kabur. Rabbi Chaim argues, and it is written in the sefer of Rabbi Chaim, that if you glue the schach down, the problem is not with the mat but with the wooden sticks. So that is not an answer. Even if you say there is no problem with the mat, you still run into the problem of the wooden sticks.

# Two Different Suggestions

I am speaking about two different suggestions. One is about tying it down with bamboo, because Rabbi Yosef says that is not kabur, since bamboo is not kabur. No, and we already spoke about this—you missed that. We discussed that Yash does not like the mats. That is the famous point. Rabbi Yerushah holds that you and I may use those mats, those things where they put the bamboos together. Yash holds that you and I may not do it. There is a raya: it is kabur, it is kabur. It is all Rashba. It is not on a scale; these are two different suggestions.

# The Problem of Kvius

There are two problems. The main problem is that it sounds like a tikrit, because the mat itself is a tikrit. I do not know who makes a tikrit like that, but be that as it may, I was thinking that perhaps Rabbi Yosef would say that in Japan, where they make the roof from bamboo, maybe that would be the problem. I do not know. I do not know what the haggadah is. But that is what Rabbi Yosef says: there is a problem of kvius, and the way the schach is made turns it into a tikrit.

So that is what Chaim Kanievsky makes clear. If I were to take schach and glue it down, then I run into this problem of kvius. I move from the problem of dovar hamekabel tumah to perhaps it is not a problem, I will just glue it—but then you run into the problem of kvius.

# The Sugya of Ma’amid

Okay, so, Rabosai, this is pretty much the sugya of ma’amid. I know that it is not necessarily l’kulei alma, and even if we pasken like the shitos that hold there is a problem of ma’amid, it is only perhaps l’chatchilah. Bedi’eved, if you have a choice, it is different.

What I think is that in Westgate, Rabosai, you do not have a choice. Your sukkah, especially those that are out there, is going to fly away. You have to tie down the sukkah. So if you do not have something to tie it down with, I do not know. Maybe you said there are things in the davar she’eino mekabel tumah that you could tie it down to. You have things that are not mekabel tumah.

# Tying It to Something Outside the Sukkah

Yeah, but if it is outside the sukkah, it is not a problem anyway. So if you tie it down to the porch—

Tie it down to the—?

No, no! You cannot tie it down to that. It has to be a davar ma’amid. I have tied it to ma’amid, no? You tie it to a post, but any ma’amid is no good. So if you tie it to the house, it is no good, Rabosai.

If I take the ma’amid and tie it to the house, which is what people do—that is what you did.

No, I did that years ago when I set up my sukkah. I should tell you not to do this. This is the sukkah. I tied my sukkah to my garage door.

# What Is the Problem With Tying It Down?

What is the problem with tying the sukkah? Is it the sukkah itself, or is it the sukkah? What? The sukkah or the sukkah? The sukkah is not allowed to be tied down.

Why can’t you put wood on top of it? So the sukkah you could attach to the house. The sukkah is not a problem; the sukkah you are supposed to attach to the house. Tie it to ma’amid.

What is a ma’amid? The sukkah is not a ma’amid. The sukkah is kasher. Even if you tie it down? The sukkah is kasher. Even if you tie it down? If you tie down a ma’amid, that is still going to be okay?

# Maimed to Maimed

You're allowed to tie down the maimed. It's a puzzle. It's a puzzle. We don't hold maimed. Only the maimed is a problem.

No, so I'm saying: could I tie down the maimed? Yeah, that's what I'm trying to tell you. Even though the shach is a puzzle if I tie it down? We're saying that a maimed is like shach. That's maimed to maimed. So we're going to learn that right now. We're not holding it yet.

Rabbi, so listen. We're getting to this, so let me just get through the maimed to maimed now. Yash is very mach maimed. I want you to have a very hard time because I use it. What, the mats? I use the bamboo mats. So Rabbi has a roll. That's not the mats he parceled. That's not true. He parceled these mats that are about made out of wood this thick. How do you know that? You spoke to Rabbi Yash? How do you know that? The square mats. That's not true. He parcels all the mats. He doesn't like any tie. These are bamboos that we have. It doesn't make a difference. He doesn't hold it in tying. He holds it in kviyas. It's a problem. The way I said about the tying down. But Yishtam doesn't hold it in mats for a different reason. That's why I told you there's two different suggahs. One suggah is the tying down, that it's kabul, like the house. And then there's another problem.

## Another Problem

What? Then you can cut it. That's what I told you yesterday. The truth is, Rabbi Yash, I'd love to teach you more and more. It's my time. So let me just, what? Let me just finish maimed and maimed. Let me just finish maimed and maimed.

The Mechaber in Tafresh, Havteh, Siman Chaf Ches, it's clearly that you have to be mechaber, kuntzai, sukkah, right? It's mutar. Go look it up. Go ahead. Tafresh, Havteh, Siman Chaf Ches. Tafresh, Havteh, Siman Chaf Ches. From here we have a raya. The Mechaber holds maimed and maimed. Oh, maimed and maimed is kosher. I told you. Maimed and maimed is not kosher. Not that. It's not kosher. Let me just finish maimed and maimed.

# Chazon Ish and the Reading of the Source

The Talmud says that this Chazon Ish is not to be listened to. We do not have to look at this Chazon Ish. It is a *chumra yeseira*, *zeira l’gezeira*, *Milchah Shleimah*, *Tinyana*, siman nun hey. And even Reb Yehoshua, believe it or not, says that the Chazon Ish is not to be laughed at, the whole Chazon Ish. He says it is a *zehirus*, and the Magen Avraham is correct, from the Mechaber, that there is no such thing as *mamed to mamed*.

# The Common Mistake in *Mamed to Mamed*

Now I want to tell you that the olam makes a big mistake in *mamed to mamed*. Rav Greinemann, as well as Rebbi in *Mo’adim u’Zmanim*, write clearly that he did not mean the nails in the walls that hold up the walls, that hold up the thing. When Rebbi Chazon Ish discussed the nails, he meant the nails in the *mamed* itself. In the nails of the *mamed* itself there is only one problem.

The baal is right when they read the Chazon Ish. The Chazon Ish does not say that. The Chazon Ish says it the way the baal says it: the nails in the walls. He says it, because those are the words of the Chazon Ish.

# What the Chazon Ish Himself Held

So what is the *tzad* anyway, the *tzad fakert*? The *tzad fakert* is that the Chazon Ish עצמו held that what he said is not to be laughed at. This is in *Orchos Rabbeinu*. *Orchos Rabbeinu* says that Reb Chaim Kanievsky heard from a mekorev of the Chazon Ish that the Chazon Ish said that he wrote it for himself and himself only.

Okay, so we are going to read it inside, *Mishlei Masenyon*, and then we are going to say goodbye to the *tzad*, okay? Here. We are going to all go out there and buy cans. He says that he only wrote it, only wrote it, *Masenyon*, down the exact page.